|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
double standards
#4280906 - 06/10/05 05:26 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
This forum is full of people yelling against tradition that tells you what to think and how to live your life.
Yet, they all have some kind of opinion on how should the rest of us live.
"the right path", the "truth of the universe", you should feel like this and think like that.
AT BEST it comes in this form: "you can do whatever you want, but don't come crying to me when..."
and everyone (a note to Icelander: not literally everyone) is trying to find some kind of path to go, like they are in school where there are rigid lessons to learn and a linear way to progress, or at least a few linear "right" ways how to progress
where does all this "how to" crap come from?
For a bunch of atheists, there sure is a lot of absolutism about everything.
where did any of you ever get idea that progress is predetermined to go in one direction?
Progress is change, change can take place in any direction
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
freddurgan
Techgnostic
Registered: 01/11/04
Posts: 3,648
Last seen: 11 years, 9 months
|
|
Well not everyone is going to like that change when/if it occurs, so people are going to bitch and say they have the right answers when really they have the answers they want, not the answers that are right.
I'm not really sure where you or I are going with this, but, yeah.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: Icelander]
#4280925 - 06/10/05 05:32 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
what's funny?
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
(a note to Icelander: not literally everyone)
This!
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: Icelander]
#4280977 - 06/10/05 05:49 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
So opinion is no longer alowed? What is wrong with opinion?
Opinion expressed as fact should be avoided, of course, but there is absolutely nothing wrong (oops! absolute?) with the mere expression of an opinion.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: trendal]
#4281116 - 06/10/05 06:47 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
it is also opinion of christians that you are a siner and a bad man for having sex before marrriage, yet those who express opinion here, criticize the christian opinion. that is why I have called this thread double standards
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
Opinion is allowed to be criticized, and anyone who can't handle having their opinions criticized should probably stay away from any kind of intellectual conversation.
I will criticize the opinions of others, and I expect people to criticize my opinions. As I said before, opinions are not facts and as such they should be subject to a nearly constant change. My opinions change all the time, as I learn new things. A good portion of the time, I change my opinions directly because someone has criticized them and shown me why my opinion may be way off mark. I don't have a problem with this. I expect it, and I need it.
"Error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it." -- Thomas Jefferson.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: trendal]
#4281139 - 06/10/05 06:58 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
oh nevermind..
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
I don't think that when someone disagrees with the opinion of another, they are saying:
"You can't have an opinion of your own...you must accept mine."
Instead it is more like:
"I think your opinion is wrong. Here is my opinion."
How is it a double-standard to have an opinion while disagreeing with the opinion of another?
It would be a double-standard to hold opinions while denying others of this right...but I don't see a lot (or any?) of that around here. Just disagreement, which is fine.
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: trendal]
#4281172 - 06/10/05 07:13 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
the usual argument agains philosophies such as christianity is that those are baseless beliefs, and nobody has a right to tell you what to do
then many of those come up with a new set of "musts" also based on baseless beliefs
I'm talking about consistancy here. First you (not you you, rethorical "you") say that you can't go around telling people what to do, then you do the same
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
Well I'll tend to agree with you on that: people who go around telling other people what they should and should not think have a serious attitude problem
A sharp distinction should be drawn, though, between "providing a viewpoint" and "forcing a viewpoint".
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
Re: double standards [Re: trendal]
#4281265 - 06/10/05 07:53 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Opinion is allowed to be criticized, and anyone who can't handle having their opinions criticized should probably stay away from any kind of intellectual conversation.
S&P is a wilderness where there are ideas (the pray) and participants (the predators). Here, a kind of natural selection of ideas takes place.
Ideas that can stand scrutiny remain and are discussed in long-lived threads; ideas full of holes and illogic get shot down quickly. The cycle repeats as we refine our ideas and converge on spiritual and philosophical Truth.
This is as it should be.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: Diploid]
#4281295 - 06/10/05 08:02 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Issues that we discuss here stretch far into the teritory of science, which automatically make them out of reach of logic and logical criticism because of lack of scientific data on the side of these here "judges"
What if all these discussions took place 400 years ago? The "judges" would probably kill of all ideas that were proven true today
What if it took 400 years in the future? Still some good ideas would have been killed because we will not know everything about the universe in 400 years.
So it most probably happens today too. The truth of tomorow can only sound ridiculous and illogical today. So logic is not a very good fortune teller.
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: double standards [Re: Diploid]
#4281720 - 06/10/05 09:44 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Diploid said: Opinion is allowed to be criticized, and anyone who can't handle having their opinions criticized should probably stay away from any kind of intellectual conversation.
S&P is a wilderness where there are ideas (the pray) and participants (the predators). Here, a kind of natural selection of ideas takes place.
Ideas that can stand scrutiny remain and are discussed in long-lived threads; ideas full of holes and illogic get shot down quickly. The cycle repeats as we refine our ideas and converge on spiritual and philosophical Truth.
This is as it should be.
Dip, Ideas that don't withstand your scrutiny still remain in people. I have seen a lot of ideas get posted and shot down by one and I left still agreeing with the original poster.
What satisfies one to come to a conclusion about the truth may not satisfy another. I require a hell of a lot more proof, personal experience and evidence then you do to come to a conclusion on a truth. To assume that all others are satisfied enough to close the book on something where you have is a misnomer.
Often, posts that appear to be shot down are just abandoned because the poster wanted to discuss an idea or possibility, not debate it. Not every one has the disposition or fortitude to handle confrontational, argumentative or debate style discussion. They will skip away, not because they feel proven wrong but because they posted for the purpose of discussion through exploration and not to debate an idea down to right and wrong.
Some, that appear to be shot down and cut at the throat by a debunker/debater type are just taken off into PMs by those who want to continue discussion, considerations and exploration , not "debate" ideas with facts. All of the data facts on existence have not been collected yet.
Like how you closed the case on remote viewing abilities because Bin Laden is not behind bars. I doubt anyone one who went into that post with opinions of remote viewing being a teachable applicable tool of ESP closed the case on it over your Bin Laden argument.
Just because one closes a case on what the truth is with facts/information that satisfy them doesn't mean others closed it.
If you think others come to the same conclusions you do , that's just funny. Some like to keep the playing field of religious spiritual exploration open and fluid, not closed up and densified.
I know darn well if someone walks away from a debate/discussion with me, it's not necessarily because they finally agreed with me or saw my point of view. I typically assume that they just made the silent agreement to agree to disagree.
By the way Dip. In the forum rules it says baiting is not allowed. Bait is something predators set out to catch prey. The rules ask that respect for a difference of beliefs be shown here.
This isn't the science forum. The shroomery has one and that is the place to tear down stuff with science fact.
A few weeks ago, someone put up a post in there about how the brazillion governtment was releasing information on the flurry of UFO activity in that region and no one touched it cept for baby hitler who made a crack about them looking to increase tourism. Why didn't you move in to debunk it there? Why didn't anyone who does it in here?
Why come off so proud to use science to shoot down, religion, spirituality or meta physics? Any body can do that. They deal with the intangible nature of reality and there is no physical proof to support ideas, experiences, beleifs and opinions in those areas.
Some blood thirsty predators that go after weak defenseless prey are sharks, jackles and vultures. yaaaaaaaaaay for them. What a feat of strength, agility, cunning and courage.
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
|
Often, posts that appear to be shot down are just abandoned because the poster wanted to discuss an idea or possibility, not debate it.
The Pub is a great place for people who don't want their ideas scrutinized.
S&P has a different slant due to the Philosophy part. What else can I tell ya...
Like how you closed the case on remote viewing abilities because Bin Laden is not behind bars.
Nope, where do you get this from?
I closed the case on remote viewing because nobody can demonstrate it.
I doubt anyone one who went into that post with opinions of remote viewing being a teachable applicable tool of ESP closed the case on it over your Bin Laden argument.
Sure Jigs, and SpaceDragon thinks contacting the reptilian masters of the galaxy is a teachable application too. That doesn't make it real either.
This isn't the science forum. The shroomery has one and that is the place to tear down stuff with science fact.
Please look up the definition of Philosophy, then get back to me.
And by the way, there is no such thing as science fact. While you're at it, please also look up the definition of Science.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
Edited by Diploid (06/10/05 10:21 PM)
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: double standards [Re: Diploid]
#4281880 - 06/10/05 10:21 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I full well realise that the philosophy part of this forum is what allows for scrutiny and reductionism and debate to take place.
It can take place without predatorial actions or mind sets.
You used that predatory prey analolgy and I don't think that is the approach the admins want people intitiating scrutiny and philosophical debate with or else they would not have the No Baiting Policy in the rules. Bait is something predators use to catch prey.
You used those words in your analogy of what S&P is like for you.
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
|
You're the one introducing the word 'bait', not me.
No Baiting Policy
Please point out a post where I 'bait'.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy
Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: double standards [Re: Diploid]
#4281916 - 06/10/05 10:31 PM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Who uses "bait" and for what? You used those two words. I didn't say you bait or set traps. You said you see S&P as a field of predators and prey. Who uses bait and for what?
If a predator doesn't use bait or set traps, he stalks. I think that is the equivalent of trolling.
If you dislike the idea of baiting or trolling then why do you like the idea of S&P being a field of predators and prey?
Whats wrong with it just being a place where people discuss and debate philosophies, spirituality and religion?
What's with all the predator, prey drama involved?
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
Frog
Warrior
Registered: 10/22/03
Posts: 4,284
Loc: The Zero Point Field
Last seen: 11 years, 2 months
|
|
Quote:
OldWoodSpecter said: it is also opinion of christians that you are a siner and a bad man for having sex before marrriage, yet those who express opinion here, criticize the christian opinion. that is why I have called this thread double standards
Let me see if I get what you are saying:
Chrisians and Agnostics/Atheists express their opinions, and no one criticizes them. But when Christians express their opinions on their own stuff, they are criticized by the Agnostics/Atheists.
Hmmm.
-------------------- The day will come when, after harnessing the ether, the winds, the tides, gravitation, we shall harness for God the energies of love. And, on that day, for the second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire. -Teilard
|
Diploid
Cuban
Registered: 01/09/03
Posts: 19,274
Loc: Rabbit Hole
|
|
You said you see S&P as a field of predators and prey.
I also put it in the context of natural selection as in the slow rabbit gets eaten by the wolf before it can reproduce and pass on its slow genes. You are the one who introduced the word 'bait'.
The parallel to ideas is that those ideas full of holes, inconsistencies, and non-sequiters get eaten and those that can stand the light of scrutiny continue.
I don't make things up, I just point out the obvious inconsistencies in belief systems. Don't shoot the messenger.
Now that I think about it, you remind me of Bill Whittle's essay Skorp posted where he's with a group of people who see a UFO. When Bill, using binoculars, identifies the UFO as a flock of birds:
How could they be birds? But they were. It was a flock of geese.
And then something happened that I will never forget: that crowd wasn?t relieved; they weren?t even disappointed. They were angry. They were angry at me. Not dogs and pitchforks and torches angry, but they were surly enough to burn the moment into my young brain.
Like Whittle's crowd of True Believers, you're angry that your ideas about mysticism, ESP, UFOs, Remote Viewing, telepathy, telekinesis, and all the rest don't hold water, and rather than honestly reevaluating your ideas, you cling to them and lash out at me.
-------------------- Republican Values: 1) You can't get married to your spouse who is the same sex as you. 2) You can't have an abortion no matter how much you don't want a child. 3) You can't have a certain plant in your possession or you'll get locked up with a rapist and a murderer. 4) We need a smaller, less-intrusive government.
Edited by Diploid (06/11/05 12:03 AM)
|
crunchytoast
oppositional
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 1,133
Loc: aporia
Last seen: 17 years, 2 days
|
|
Quote:
Progress is change, change can take place in any direction
absolutely? is this always true? isn't this an absolute statement? a kind of absolutism? all beliefs are expressed in absolutes. in my opinion there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
IMO it's natural to try to impose one's will on the world. even saying imposition-of-will is wrong, is an attempt at imposing one's will.
-------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: Frog]
#4282644 - 06/11/05 06:41 AM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
No you didn't get it
christians express their opinion, then some people say its bullshit and then say the same thing: that there is a right path, a cosmic morality etc etc.
It's like me saying to you: "orange juice is crap in my opinion, what I really like is orange juice"
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
|
yes, I am imposing my own ideas, I am evil, I am inconsistant
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
trendal
J♠
Registered: 04/17/01
Posts: 20,815
Loc: Ontario, Canada
|
|
It's like me saying to you: "orange juice is crap in my opinion, what I really like is orange juice"
Actually it's more along the lines of:
"orange juise is crap in my opinion, what I really like is apple juice."
--------------------
Once, men turned their thinking over to machines in the hope that this would set them free. But that only permitted other men with machines to enslave them.
|
OldWoodSpecter
waiting
Registered: 02/01/05
Posts: 4,033
Loc: mountains and lakes
Last seen: 17 years, 5 months
|
Re: double standards [Re: trendal]
#4282732 - 06/11/05 08:09 AM (18 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not refering to the contents of these theories, but their orientations
To be more specific it is like this:
"how can think that anyone should prefer orange juice, it's ridiculous, you have no basis for that, you should prefer apple juice"
-------------------- I descend upon your earth from the skies I command your very souls you unbelievers Bring before me what is mine
|
crunchytoast
oppositional
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 1,133
Loc: aporia
Last seen: 17 years, 2 days
|
|
i dont think you're evil maybe not even inconsistent maybe you just prefer one kind of absolutism over another. IMO your heart is in the right place.
i wonder about the OJ/apple juice thing- i think ego's defenses is the answer. everyone's empty in a sense- but people prefer to look at the emptiness in others over the emptiness in themselves.
what's the point of staring at your own emptiness anyway? best i can figure is it's a means to end at most.
-------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
Edited by crunchytoast (06/11/05 08:47 PM)
|
psyillyazul
verbal doubleedged sword BFTD
Registered: 12/13/04
Posts: 412
Loc: zion
|
|
"everyone's empty in a sense- but people prefer to look at the emptiness in others over the emptiness in themselves." Goal is to fill your Self up.
|
crunchytoast
oppositional
Registered: 04/07/05
Posts: 1,133
Loc: aporia
Last seen: 17 years, 2 days
|
|
i agree i'm saying the only way to be filled is by not looking at yourself
like people have beliefs in facts+ beliefs in values you look at others and you can see the difference (those people it's just their values with no foundation) but for yourself you think that your values are fact until you stare at that long enough and it falls apart so the only way to stay whole is to look outward
-------------------- "consensus on the nature of equilibrium is usually established by periodic conflict." -henry kissinger
|
psyillyazul
verbal doubleedged sword BFTD
Registered: 12/13/04
Posts: 412
Loc: zion
|
|
Its okay to believe. You just have to find the path with no inconsistencies. It really is a path of MOST resistance.
|
Shampioenier
Storm in aTeaCup
Registered: 07/29/05
Posts: 260
Loc: Milky Way Galaxy
Last seen: 17 years, 8 months
|
|
what about quadruple standards?
I know a hiprocrite who's not a hipocrite; how's that for absolute hipocricy!
|
|